commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <>
Subject Re: [all] Shared build causes issues in releases
Date Thu, 08 Apr 2004 01:16:32 GMT

Anything wrong with the idea of including commons-build with every source

I'm all in favour of attempting to enforce similarity on the Commons
projects. Anything which is unable to follow the same build pattern is
dubious of having a place in Commons in my view. Possibly Maven needs to
be better on the inheritence side, but why not standardise on src/java
rather than src/share [or vice versa..personally I hate src/share].

That way, and with increasing creation of scripts/plugins, commons
development can be about the component, not the build system, site, naming
conventions, additional tools etc.

To release Commons Xxxx, I want to do:   maven jk-commons:release -Dalpha
I don't want to spend lots of time figuring out all the little bits. This
is a lot of the hold up for me with releasing IO, I've just not had time
to get back up to speed with the changes to the commons build process over
the last year. [Plus I'm not sure my PGP things work on the new machine as
I don't really get PGP :)]

maven jk-commons:new-component would be nice too, and a whole lot of other

[rambling of someone who is currently nothing but a disapointment to
commons at the moment]


On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Martin Cooper wrote:

> How does this work, though, if someone downloads a source distro? Is there
> going to be a source distro for commons-build that someone (?) maintains and
> builds? How would the right version of that get associated with any given
> component source distro?
> The people who usually download source distros often do so because they are
> not able to use CVS, for whatever reason, to obtain the files that way. So
> they will not have the ability to use a label to make the version
> association, and they will need to download a second, separate, source
> distro in order to build what they originally wanted.
> That just doesn't seem workable to me.
> --
> Martin Cooper
> "Gary Gregory" <> wrote in message
> IMO, it is fine to say: In order to build [project] you also need
> [commons-build].
> Gary
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message